Re: Another Culture Change
 

Ask FIRST why it exists. You'll get this answer:

There's nothing in FIRST's mission that supports a proposal that 100% student-built robots are preferable to partnership-built robots.

Even supposing that there exist such 100% mentor-built robots, that's an easy question to answer. The thing about FIRST that distinguishes it from basically every other superficially similar organization is the emphasis on mentoring by professionals. Bringing students through a disciplined engineering process gives them the knowledge that such processes are important for consistent success. Showing students how to do analysis and design gives them the right idea about real-world engineering and technology.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I would argue that, more so than any other style team, elite level powerhouse teams teach their students the most valuable lesson they can learn in FIRST; Teaching students how to win.

Teaching students to work hard, smart, and for very long hours (many more than most would think) to achieve a goal at the highest level is an extremely valuable lesson. Achieving a goal by merely finishing, or reaching mediocrity is not acceptable; Excellence is the only satisfactory result.

I will probably get flack for implying that non-elite teams don't teach their students this, but it's true (they teach students to finish, but allow them to settle at less than perfection); They simply aren't on the same level. If they were, the results would be more equivalent.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I pretty much 100% agree with this. I don't think this should get flack, because on my old team there was always the attitude that I hated of "hey it works!" and "its good enough." (They have drastically changed this mentality). Elite teams do not share this mentality. They do not compromise.

I especially love the highlighted part. This is because I have always felt that if you are paying large amounts of money to compete in FRC, why would you waste your time and not put 150% of your time and effort into the program? I firmly believe this quote goes along with the other quotes in my signature.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

There really is a lot to learn from reading through this thread. I have had the fortunate experience of traveling around my region to help support teams, both new and veteran, who ask questions along these lines. After hearing the question I remind them of what the mission of FIRST is, that one of the great things about FIRST is the mentor component, and I tell them that you get from the experience what you put into it. There are just as many team setups as there are teams in the entire organization. Everyone has different resources and means to achieve the ends, inspiration.

Whenever my team attends a competition, my mentors and I tell our students to go learn something. It can be anything technical or non-technical, and we learn a lot! The mentors make it a point to do the same with the students. From doing this, we are all able to walk out knowing that we will continue to improve for the future.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I couldn't agree more with this statement. Our team has struggled in the past on the distribution between mentor and student design. The main goal of FIRST is to 'inspire' students to take interest in science and technology, not to build a robot.

What we have found is that a careful balance is needed to teach the students the design process, but not expect them to design everything. For Lunacy, the mentors did all of the calculations to determine how much stored energy was required to propel the ball over the goal and implemented that design criteria into an actual subsystem design. However, the students were there every step of the way and helped fabricate and build the design. By the end of the process they understood that mathematics can be applied into real world scenarios and saw the outcome of the application. At the end of the design almost all students could recite the process of how they went from an idea to a product. This is much better than trying to show applications of math by figuring out where two trains leaving two stations at different times and different speeds meet each other :)

We need to remember that constantly we hear that FIRST is 'not about the robot,' but inspiring young people to have the same passion for engineering that the mentor's have. Every team will do this a different way and there will never be a 'right' and 'wrong' way of doing it.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

None of our students realized that simply adding a gusset to our lift arm would reduce the torque required by the motor by 43%. Indeed, most of our mentors didn't either...

...but it took our Woodie Flowers Award-winning mentor to walk kids through the design, why it was a good idea, and how to do it properly. None of them would have been ABLE to do it.

I see little value in a bunch of kids sitting around sharing their ignorance. They might learn something, sure -- but they won't be using the engineering design process all that well, and they won't be learning nearly as much.

There's nothing, and I mean NOTHING, wrong with learning from mentors as they help you design a robot, even if that means that sometimes the mentors shoulder some of the design work themselves.

This entire argument of student-vs-mentor built is silly. All-student-built robots might have their place (though I doubt there is truly such thing), as do student-and-mentor built robots, and even all-mentor-built robots (though I really, really, REALLY doubt there is such thing).

Re: Another Culture Change
 

Depends on the person to be fair; some students will not take anything away under such conditions.

There is however more to robotics than the robot. Business skills, PR, community outreach, website involvement, people skills, a sense of community, networking all are taught through FIRST absent the robot.

I personally am the CAD group leader on my team. I do not intend to go into designing, but into management, public relations, or marketing. Why? Because I've learned through FIRST that I find my greatest joy in working with people. I'd call this FIRST inspiration, even if it didn't come from building a bot!

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I think we need to discern between "student built", "student fabricated" and "student designed"

On my team, mentors have little, if any, input into the machining process, but once our all student machining team finishes it's stuff, it goes to a coalition of students and mentors. Design is likewise: Students work with mentors on the design (though the design is decided by popular vote of students, and calculations are done by students. CAD is also 100% student based.) However, there is always a mentor assigned to a design team to help guide it from doing stupid things.

Yes, of course our mentors help in the building, its their favorite part! And how could we deny them it!

Re: Another Culture Change
 

This is an interesting topic, and probably deserves its own discussion.

Our team has a good mixture of students that are there because they really want to learn about this stuff, and students that don't start out so interested (and in-between of course). You have to have the driven personalities to make things go, but the other end of the spectrum has a lot to get out of this program.

We request that teachers send students to us that they see as having a lot of potential, but maybe haven't found a reason to put that potential to good use. We commit to trying to win the competition and we play on the competitive spirit of human nature to trick these students into getting heavily involved. Before long, some of them are finding that they like this stuff and that gives them a reason get motivated. It doesn't always work, but we try our best.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I had the pleasure of attending the Pittsburgh Regional with my son's team, and had some nice conversations with a few of 1114's mentors. I know my son's team had some discussions/interactions with students from 1114, all of which he described in positive terms. My son's team has had interactions with Simbotics at other events, and his team has always enjoyed rising to the new level of competition that 1114 brings to any event they attend.

During the first rounds of the eliminations, there was a human player that appeared to be attempting to damage their bot, or at least get it to drop a tube. They were awarded a red card for this, and rightfully so. I don't know if it ended there; I hope they were told that kind of stuff won't be tolerated. Maybe there needs to be a penalty that follows you to your next event...kind of like a Flagrant Foul in basketball. I didn't see any boo'ing in the stands, and I was only in the pits minimally so I certainly didn't witness anything there. I will say I attempted to talk to some adults from an unruly team that was near us in the stands. ("When your kids do this, this is how affects us.") We got nowhere with them. We shook it off, and our students just dealt with it showing the professionalism you expect from an FRC team.

I certainly hope to see Simbotics at Pittsburgh next year. They are an awesome team, with great drive and focus. I had a great time cheering them on during practice, qualification and eliminations. I know somewhere on this message board I read the following quote- “Instead of wanted to beat them, we now want to be like them.” I think it is a process for kids (and some adults!)…first they see greatness and are intimidated, they have to stick around long enough to appreciate greatness and recognize what can be taken from the experience.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

As long as excellence is not exclusively defined as a blue banner, I can get behind this...

Re: Another Culture Change
 

And yet, excellence should come through ***striving for*** a blue banner.

I don't care if my team wins. I care if they try their hardest to win.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

Amen to that. There needs to be a target to shoot for, but you can't be disappointed if you fall short of that blue banner or trophy.

"Aim for the Moon...That way, if you miss, you'll still be among the stars." - W. Clement Stone

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I'm curious as to what this HP was doing. At the St. Louis regional I witnessed a couple of HP's intentionally throwing tubes at tubes robots were carrying. It actually worked once or twice, and no penalties were called; I do not believe doing such is against the rules, nor should it be (IMO). How could an HP damage a robot?

Re: Another Culture Change
 

What you wrote in the message I quoted is a fine and worthy sentiment; but if you want to agree with Chris, then I sincerely suggest agreeing without slipping the Blue Banner back into the equation. If you disagree with him then certainly feel free to unambiguously say so.

If I may put some words in his mouth, his point is that there are so many off-the-field goals that a team can (and should) pursue, that using on-the-field performance as the "600 pound gorilla" metric for assessing an FRC team's success is something that should not occur automatically or otherwise become a habit. The blue banner is only one of many targets a team can shoot for.

On the field performance is interesting and exciting, and some teams choose to make it the foundation they derive many other good things from; but while it is a useful way too decide if a team's robot is excellent, it is not the right way to decide if a team is "excellent" (whatever that might mean).

I can imagine many hypothetical teams that would be excellent in many important senses of the word that are also pertinent in FIRST; but who would not build an excellent robot. I recommend devloping a habit of explicitly not using blue banner counts to evaluate teams.

Blake

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I was trying to go for the point that on field success can be achieved without actually winning the competition, but Blake's point is also valid. Not everyone's aim is to walk away with a regional win - there are other goals and metrics for success a team can choose to go for.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I wasn't trying to put words in anyone's mouth but my own.

I am of the opinion that if you are not striving for that most important of Blue Banners -- the Chairman's Award -- then you are not being all that you can be as a FIRST team, and that your students and mentors aren't getting everything out of the experience that they could be.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

To take this a step further, once mentors or coaches have instilled a system that creates excellence, more students want to be a part of that system. I know the original point of your post was to point out that powerhouse teams do not have superior students, but I think to an extent the better teams in FIRST can have students who are more motivated and interested in pursuing the engineering challenges it presents. If you look at elite sports programs in an area, once that program has sustained success, students will choose that school over another or will try out for that sport when they wouldn't have taken an interest before just because they know of its success. A FIRST team could be similar; successful teams are more likely to attract students who are undecided about the extracurricular activities they should pursue, and a student who has a strong engineering interest and the option of choosing between two schools with FIRST teams may be inclined to go to the school with the more successful team.

Note that I don't define success in terms of winning, since FIRST has many definitions of success as has been discussed at length.


Now about my team specifically, we are a team that is both student and mentor built. While there are times when the mentors are teaching students (especially those new to the program), often students and mentors work as equals on the team. Design discussions involve suggestions from both students and mentors, and build consists of students building part of an arm while a mentor takes another part of the arm to be welded (since there are no welding facilities at the school). There have been years where certain subteams are more student or mentor built depending on resources but the average is still that they are on equal ground.

If a team were to see us at competition, it would be easy to mistake us as an entirely mentor built team, even though that's far from the truth. For example at this year's regional, we had 7 mentors, 3 teachers/chaperones, and 10 students, though the numbers varied by day. Of the students on the team only 3 were usually in the pit, since 3 were on the drive team and the other 4 were distributing buttons, watching matches, etc. If you came by our pit at the wrong time you might see 3 mentors on the robot and no students (or mistake some of our students for mentors), and think "wow, the students don't do any work on that team". In reality the drive team was off discussing strategy for the next match and the students in the pit were quickly eating lunch, but if that's the only time you see our pit the wrong impression will stick with you.

So please teams, don't assume students aren't learning because you saw "only mentors" in the pits with the robot, or somehow "know" that mentors built their robot. You likely have just seen a team at the wrong time, and it's hard to shake first impressions.

Interestingly, our team has always had close to a 1:1 ratio between mentors and students because of the low number of students we usually have and the high number of mentors who like to get involved. And while we've always fielded robots that are at least mildly competitive, we have never won a regional competition and have only been finalists once in 11 years. Heck, this year was only the third time we've finished in the top 8 at an event. So I have to question the notion that a mentor heavy team will dominate other FIRST teams, because that has never been our experience.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

Just a point of curiosity... I am not trying to argue but please consider this.
At the Alamo regional, a tube occasionally hung on a robot where it was not intended. When that happened, there was a penalty assessed on that robot if it also held a game piece. The rules state that you may only possess one game piece at a time. So much has been made over knowing the actual facts that I have to ask about the 1114 incident... was this an intentional act by a student to damage a robot or a tactic to cause that robot delay wile trying to dislodge the game piece? I'm not sure it is against the rules to hit a robot with a game piece but I would like to know if there is a specific prohibition to doing so. In any case... did the student admit he was trying to damage the robot or is that just a perception?


Steve

Re: Another Culture Change
 

It should be that opposing alliances forcing teams into penalties receive a yellow card, while opposing alliances forcing teams into red cards receive red cards.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I want to highlight what you said here because my original statement didn't say what I really wanted it to say - it was close, but I left something important out (and you added it for me).

What I meant to say about the high school students is that it is unlikely for the students at WildStang's high schools to be much better than the students of any other high school. From a probability standpoint, the inherent abilities (i.e. talents) of one population of children will not be far superior to another group. The difference is more attributable to the level of education, training, etc.

What you said is also true: success breeds success. People like to be a part of a winning team, so when the team is successful you start to attract even more students which means you can get better students (once again, probability: if you are taking 20 students on the team, your 20 will be better if 60 show up to try out than if only 30 show up.)

Re: Another Culture Change
 

Chris, I wonder if you're reading a little too much into a very simple statement. How did you get all of that out of a single line? If we look at what exactly was quoted (just the facts, ma'am), to extrapolate all of that intent out of a single line requires not only a lack of the benefit of doubt, but an assumption of ill will.

Not to sound rude, but I was asking JVN specifically, not because he could give a better answer, but I assumed there was more to that event than what he wrote. In that case, he could possibly elaborate on what was actually objectionable. As it stands, I think it's hard to see what the problem is unless you are making (less than charitable) assumptions about the mindset of those who said such a thing.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

If "out of the way, student built robot coming through" is coupled with an aggressive action (a shove), I think it's pretty clear that all of those points are implied.

What context could the above have happened in where none of those points are true? I don't get what you're seeing at all.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I gotta say, I'm with Chris on this one. There's a lot of difference between "ROBOT!" (which apparently merits its own thread) and "Student-built robot coming through!".

To specify "Student-built" would, to me, say that the in-the-way team does not belong in the competition, and should be so embarassed by their "Adult-built" robot that they should cower in shame and allow the "proper" team through - you know, the team that "deserves" to be there and has a place in the "high school competition".

I wouldn't classify this as a display of jealousy as I would contempt. Neither of those are Inspiration, and neither of them have a place in FRC - or life for that matter.

That's (how I view) the purpose of this thread - how do we as a culture-changing-entity transform that negative, contagious, contemptuous energy into positive, infectious, inspirational energy?

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I don't know about jealousy, to a degree it does have it's place in FRC: as a motivational tool to become something greater. When I see an excellent team performing well, I'm jealous of their students, but that quickly turns into a drive to become like that team. That's not to say it can't turn into contempt, as the events at Pittsburgh show (supposedly). It's always easier to make an accusation than to change the way you view the world, and we as humans are lethargic. This isn't really an issue involved with FIRST, it's an issue with human nature. The only thing I can see FIRST doing is clearing the symptoms, but there will always be people that don't understand, because FIRST is an organization whose goal is growth and expansion. The events in Pittsburgh may be condemnable, but I'm glad there are powerhouse teams like 1114 that can take¹ attacks like this, because they're also the ones that get it and have the power to change our views on how the world should work.

¹Not to say they deserve what they get, or that it's fair

Re: Another Culture Change
 

Which is exactly what we need to do - transform the jealousy into motivation. Was there a specific instance that "turned on the light" for you to be able to make this leap? What can we as leaders do to instill in others a similar reaction?

Re: Another Culture Change
 

As previously stated in this thread, I used to be the jealous one. It was not until 2006 Champs when I met the teams we refer to as the "powerhouses" that I became motivated to step up to their level.

Yes, just by putting a robot on the field we become successful. However, most human nature tends to not be satisfied with the bare minimum. This being said, I have since graduated and went to college. My team has since taken leaps forward. Some of our first generation members are making it through college and returning to the area to work. What is the significance of this? We are building the connections to allow us to go the next step. We have more trained mentors in the fields we were once lacking.

I have spent numerous hours researching and asking questions to such people that are very insightful. I can tell that they are very helpful and offer more than a simple answer. We have not only wanted the help on the technical side of our team, but also on the non-technical side. We have since won a RCA this year and this would not be possible without the help of others.

How did we take these steps?
It was easy once we got over the fact that we were not those teams, and we have to apply what we have learned to the scope of our team.
- sit down and do some research, ask questions - they will answer
- go after new sponsors, targeting the capabilities you desire (we added machine shops that provided limited machining capabilities)
- set out a time line of events (take small steps, change is often hard at first)
- "offseason" is a critical R&D period, we finally went with a omni-directional drive and will be optimizing a swerve drive we developed in the off-season
- don't be afraid to fail, we all hit bumps in the road. It is how we get passed them that sets us apart

The list goes on. We have slowly transformed over the past 3-4 years to what we are today. We have one more year left on a plan we made, and now we are starting to set goals for the next several years.

For what is worth, do not judge a team based on web-appearance. Take the time to get to know them. I have had no issue getting help from them. Feel free to ask me questions about our transformation process, granted we are not a powerhouse team.

One last note: Remember to have fun during the process!

Re: Another Culture Change
 

We apparently have vastly different interpretations of 'failure.' You're basing failure on our team's final product on the field. By that measure, yes we typically succeed.

What most people don't see are all the failures that lead up to ultimate success. Our secret isn't that we don't fail. The secret is that we typically fail early and often enough in the season so we have time to to recover and fix the failures. Most of the great teams operate this way. The other secret, as others have stated, is that we don't settle for bad solutions. If one of our designs is a failure, we improve it until it works.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I find the discussion about how teams operate and build their robots interesting. I know that doing well is very important. Why? It is much easier to convince your school system/sponsors to continue the support when you do well and bring home hardware. Student enthusiasm is also difficult.

However, the real issue here is teaching the mentors to mentor. We have one mentor, very hard working and spends lots of time at the shop. He is beyond dedicated. He knows EXACTLY how his part of the bot needs to be built and tells the kids what to do, and lets them do the building under his direction. His subteam size tends to dwindle towards the end of the build season. He likes to tell other mentors how their team needs to build their part of the bot.

We have another mentor, also dedicated, also spends much time at the shop- but only with his subteam. He also knows EXACTLY how his part of the bot needs to be built. But instead of saying "this is what we need to do", he helps the students come to that place on their own. Sometimes it is a longer process to get there, and sometimes he has to use breadcrumbs to get them there. Sometimes they come up with brilliant ideas that he feels exceed his and they implement. Sometimes the team comes up with a plan that is the "same thing only different" than an otherwise standard design. He would usually go with the student based design rather than standard design (all else equal).

The difference is that subteam 1 works fast, efficient, and although built by the students, they feel like employees rather than team members. They are given chores, and a timeline. Their input does not feel valued. Subteam 2 has team members that are consistent, give up date night, and wake early for their meetings on Saturday. They do homework together so they can work more on the bot. They see their mistakes, and seek out assistance from their team members, mentor, and other resources. They learn, and they get excited about the process. They are proud of their creation.

Both mentors are wonderful people. Both want to teach the students. One is successful in teaching more than manual skills. One teaches teamwork and design.

Mentor classes to teach team building and how to encourage leadership and creativity, and how to be inclusive on your team would be a fabulous thing!

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I'll preface this with 2 statements:
1. By "you" I mean "putting you in our shoes for a second".
2. We don't have a single banner. Yet the lack of banners is hardly an indicator of impact.

So you strive for the CA blue banner 1 year. Then you do it again for another 3-4 years, only to never be told why you're not good enough for the #1 spot in CA. The judges comments are all positive or vague. Your outreach is so insane the school board took it over because they didn't want you dealing with so much responsibility. The sheer numbers of people who've gone through programs your team started is somewhat unbelievable. Your programs have been recognized nationally with multiple awards, your DOE-approved STEM curricula have been implemented in multiple other states, 1/4 of your alumni still mentor or volunteer in FIRST, 50% of your students learn so much they get paid internships over college students, you've started the FRC/FTC/FLL teams that FIRST encourages for growth, and you/your team have been interviewed for 4 books, 2 TV shows, and featured in a couple of (mostly local) print articles. Out of breath yet?

In the end, you forget about the blue banner. The blue banner is an obsession that makes you feel like some puppet master is dangling a carrot just to play mind games with anyone who's interested. What really matters is impact, and that impact worth far more than the fabric or even the symbolism that a CA banner is made of. This becomes even more evident when you realize that an increasing amount of teams & regional events means that there is less chance you'll be noticed amongst the many interviewing for the award.

Which is why this year, we're striving for a robot banner. Woohoo!

Re: Another Culture Change
 

Moot. Winning a blue banner is nice, but that's all it is. It is the striving for the blue banner that matters.

Competition fosters excellence -- that's all I'm saying.

I couldn't agree more.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I could not agree more. After attending the Chairman's Chat at last year's Championships, our team took a totally different approach this year.

We did not do things for the sole purpose of the Chairman's Award (CA). We set out to do things that met the following criteria:
1. benefited the community in a positive way
2. could use the opportunity to pass on the importance science and technology
3. we felt like it was the right thing to do
4. it needed to be fun

Based on these requirements we set up events and made appearances. The end result, a fun way of spreading the STEM imitative to the local area. Yes, we ended up winning the Chesapeake RCA. We knew what we did was great (same scenario as you Jesse), to get a banner (our first in 10 years of existence) was just icing on the cake. We have more events lined up. Why? Because as a team we feel they are important, not because of a blue banner.

This is the approach we took. CA gives you a generic starting point, but be creative in the solutions and make sure you are doing things for the right reason.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

(Your post prompted me to say this, but it isn't in direct response to your situation).

Some mentors are more effective at teaching students than others, but I don't think we should judge people on their preferences of mentoring. Every team and every mentor has a different way of helping and inspiring students. Every student has a different way in which they need to be helped and a way in which they are inspired.

Every team operates differently. Just because some teams operate differently than your team doesn't mean their way is wrong. Apparently root of the problem in this thread is that some teams thought 1114 had the "wrong approach" to making a robot. Their approach inspires students; their students have fun; their students learn. That's all that matters. Just because your team does it in a way that you perceive to be correct, doesn't mean other teams are cheating. 1114 is wonderful; they've inspired me and many others. Whatever they are doing is working.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

Identify the root causes, acknowledge them, and educate in an on-going manner - team level, area level, and region level.

John provides insight by suggesting small shifts. Eventually, the culmination of small shifts creates a large shift. They already have if a small group can be fingered as the ones behind the booing, rather than an entire arena filled with boos. The shift is occurring and it, too, should be acknowledged and sustained as it develops.

A factor that should be explored is the overwhelming nature of mentoring. Yes, there are areas that provide workshops to help mentors. How many areas provide a time for mentors to understand a part of the big picture so that they can continue to grasp it and help it develop? How many areas have created a place/space for mentors to be allowed to share their doubts/concerns/frustrations and then help them turn those into fun challenges seeking creative and innovative solutions?

The minibot has created a place here in CD where some wonderful exchanges and food for thought have occurred and will likely continue to occur. Yes, it has been controversial. What's wrong with that? Why is that a negative? Are growing pains negative or are they productive, as painful as they are, when one grows through them? In the area that I'm from, turning 16 is a big deal. Change occurs when driving becomes a new development in a teen's and a family's life. 18 becomes a big deal when the teenager is viewed as an adult and has responsibilities and opportunities that were not there before. 21 is another milestone. All of those changes bring opportunity but they also bring added responsibility and some stress/tension/worry/concern. The 20th anniversary is a milestone and I think the game has reflected that. It has given all of the teams, old and new - an opportunity to see what our community is made of and how strong we are - how well-developed we are. How tough we are. How we face new challenges. Many of us talk about the beauty and inspiration behind innovation. Well, more than robots can be innovative - so can a FRC game. We all shifted. In our postmortems, many of us will look at the shift and determine how well we did as a team. Perhaps, some of us will look at the shift and determine how well we did as individual leaders. I hope the 25th anniversary provides an opportunity for another shift and that the community is curious enough and cares enough to explore it and think about and talk about it, like we have with the 20th.

Jane

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I wonder if this could this be a root cause of being accused of having a mentor-built robot: your robot looks like something that many students on other teams don't know how to build

What are some ways to change this mistaken perception?

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I am appalled and embarrassed by what FRC 1114 experienced and inspired by their reaction. I hope my team (FRC 2789) has an opportunity to interact with this team at some future Regional; they deserve a much warmer welcome and much more positive and gracious interactions.

Also, thank you FRC 148 for developing another awe-inspiring robot this year. Video of your robot hanging 2 ubertubes during autonomous has captivated the imagination of the administration at my school. They want to WIN (we are the only varsity sport on our campus) and they view your team as the team to beat. Because you are so awesome, they are finally starting to understand the resources we need to assemble in order to build and sustain a great FIRST team. They are FINALLY letting our team submit proposals to acquire more tools and more space so we can begin building the on-site machine shop we need to build good robots.

I can also tell that FRC 148's students belong to a team with great culture, mentorship and training because they spent a lot of time in our pit during the Alamo Regional helping us fix our minibot deployment system. Thanks again for this assistance.

Finally, JVN, I think you're an alien. That is one the highest compliments I give people. It's what I call people that are so good that they are not of this earth. When I grow up, I want to be an alien, like you.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

A start would be to create another thread, Jim. With this information and question, asking for suggestions/ways that can help bring about change. This thread is exploratory in nature - that thread could be more specific in nature. Just a thought.

Jane

Re: Another Culture Change
 

This is a really cool book that talks about changing cultural behaviors:
http://www.amazon.com/Influencer-Pow...=AG56TWVU5XWC2

This particular thread addresses at least 2 of 6 areas (according to the book) that are required to influence change.

I will leave it at this otherwise I will explode with a rather lengthy post on this subject...

The Student vs. Mentor debate is (in my opinion) the "Guinea Worm" of FRC.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

Go for it, Ike. :) Teach us.

Jane

Re: Another Culture Change
 

Hee hee. I love getting positive and negative reputation for the same comment. It makes me think I said something worth expending neurotransmitter time on...

Re: Another Culture Change
 

Don't say I didn't warn you....
****************************
If you are trying to get someone to change, then you have to have answers for some questions:

Influencer talks about targeting 6 key aspects:
Personal Motivation
-Overcome Reluctance and Resistance by Connecting with Values

Personal Ability
-New behaviours require new skills. Overinvest in how to master skills and emotions.

Social Motivation
-Enlist Leaders, Partner with Opinion Leaders, and become a Leader Yourself

Social Ability
-Amplify Influence through Just in Time Teamwork

Structural Motivation
-Modestly and Intelligently reward early success. Punish only when necessary.

Structural Ability
-Using Environment to Support New Behaviours

This is a really good read that talks about some of the difficulties of erradicating dangerous or unwanted behaviours.

************************************************** **
This thread is basically a call to action for the Social Motivation and Structural Motivation. Enlist opinion leaders, Punish unwanted behaviours. What it is not covering is Modestly and Intelligently rewarding early successes.
I would argue that in many cases telling someone they are wrong will be significantly less effective than embracing that group and engaging them. If you just berate the behaviours, then at best you will convince them to change. This will be a change due to fear of persecution rather than a change of willfully wanting to change. More than likely, you will actually may make a stronger foe now with justified reasons. There are a few teams in the area that have a rather low opinion of a great team I personally have a ton of respect for. I talk with their team leads on a regular basis about what their processes are like, and what we do. When negative talk comes up about the great team, I often ask where did that information come from? I explain that hasn't been my experiences with the team, and then sight specific positive interactions I have had versus the second stories they have been told. It is still a work in progress, but it is work that is progressing.
*****************************************
Another really good tool to use the anecdote that relates to that behaviour. The "i once felt the same way as you" is a very effective means of Personal Motivation and Personal Ability. Instead of directly telling someone they are wrong, sharing an anecdote of when you were a "hater" or how you have dealt with jealousy in the past in both negative and positive manners. Showcase how the positive jealousy response improved the situation and how the negative response did not.

There are a lot of great examples in this thread. The anecdote is powerful because it explains your motivation to make a change, and that you were able to do it.

*************************************
Another key aspect that we are getting here in Michigan is some Structural Motiviation, and Structural Ability.

If you are "moderate to low resource" team in the rest of FRC, you typically only go to 1 event. Going to 1 event does a couple things. It adds a lot of pressure to your performance and expectations. You have spent a lot of time, money, and effort to compete at this 1 event only to have your hopes and dreams shattered due to XYZ failure. When you look across the pits you see a team that rises above those issues and kicks your butt. What you don't know is they have already had those issues and fixed them.
The XYZ failure also gives you an excuse why you weren't better. If we hadn't had XYZ break, then we would have been really awesome. Of course we had a kid do XYZ, so we are better by having the kid do XYZ and it fail, then to have mentors make the same part/code, and it not fail. In reality it has very little to "who" did XYZ, and is more of a matter of when and how XYZ got tested and fixed (Build week 4, build week 6, on the practice field, in compeition...). Good teams break their season enders before they compete. They learned this by competing at multiple events and broke things at the first event, fixed them at the second, did better, and then vowed to test/break it before their first event next year.
Here, because every team has 2 events, this gets rid of the excuse, and you have to prove it. Yes teams still have a lot of trouble at their first event, but almost everybody improves by their second. Because of this, they have a better appreciation of what it takes to be really good. This has been an underlying "personal motivation" adopted by many teams to get better. They also have a better understanding of the difference between really good, and Great. Any team can be really good with modest resources, hard work, and SMART work. Greatness is much more difficult. Greatness does require more resources (than modest). These resources include experience, funds, and contacts mostly.
I cannot think of a great team that competes at only 1 regional. There are several good ones, but I cannot think of a single Great one.

The district sturcutre also has more events which allow for more teams to share in a win. There are certain regions that would be excessively difficult to compete in. Michigan was one of these. Even with 3 events, the same teams always took the top spots. Now with 9 events, there is more sharing. There are 27 event winner slots. There are 9 District Chairman's award slots.

The district structure is not a cure to this issue, but I do believe it helps quite a bit with the structural motivation and ability aspects.

Other Structural Ability/Motivational items would include teaming with young teams. Both rookies and other young teams. The Jealousy response is quite prevalent throughout all of humanity, so just assume it will be a natural response. Through partnerships and mentoring, you can work against these natural tendencies. You can also help make the teams stronger. Which reduces the jealousy potential.

***********************************************

The key to change is strict adherence to covering all 6 categories.

***********************************************
The reason I compare it to the "guinea worm", is the guinea work is a painful plague that has been around for a long time. The worm causes painful sores on the limbs that can only be soothed in developing countries by submersing yourself in water. Once in the water, the sores release tihe microscopic larvae into the villages water supply, and thus infect others, and so the cycle continues.

The comments made that originated this thread are a plague as well. Rookie teams tend to start out appreciate role model teams and the assistance that team may have given them. The assistance goes away (usually to support a different rookie), and the team is left on their own. The pain of not doing well is frequently soothed by mentors or parents explaining the reason that team is better is because the mentors do everything. This infects the students and spreads like the guinea worm among their team. Within a year or two, the plague matures into taunts, boos, and bullying statements. This is overheard by others. Some know to get away from that sort of behaviour, but others are infected. And so the cycle repeats. This isn't helped when teams that have a fair amount of success look down at other teams. Yes, it does happen that way too.

Please note, I am not saying that student-"only" teams are the plague. They are cool in my book. Teams that look down on other teams are the plague. This comes from any and all directions (up, down, left, and right).

Re: Another Culture Change
 

There are many ways people measure excellence in FIRST. To some it is all about the robot and I am impressed with the work and organization of teh "elite teams". they are amazing to watch compete on the field.
But time in and time out the one team that never ceases to amaze me when I am in their presence is team 365 MOE. It amazes me how their presence at a regional takes the place over and affects so many teams. They are always in other teams pits helping teams get their robots ready for the competition. They may not always have the best robot but they are thorough and professional inn every aspect. they are enthusiastic and gracious in victory and defeat ( and I've seen plenty of teams in my travels who do not take defeat well at all. This is one lesson they should truly take from MOE). To me they are the pinnacle of what FIRST should strive to be.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I think the Chairman's Judges agree with you...

Re: Another Culture Change
 

clap clap
clap clap
clapclapclapclap
GO MOE!

Re: Another Culture Change
 

^They are so infectious, other teams did their cheer when MOE won awards at Chesapeake. Top to bottom class act. No disrespect to the 08-10 Chairman's Winners, but MOE is very in sync to the goals of FIRST and will likely become the second team to win two Chairman's Awards.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

The mentor-built student-built debate reminds me of the struggle I had getting my mind around my change in roles in moving to FRC after coaching FLL. In FLL, coaches are admonished that 'kids do the work'. FIRST clearly spells out the role of a coach in the coach's handbook which says "the team must design and build the robot, not you or any other adult", and in the FLL Core Values which reads "We do the work to find solutions with guidance from our coaches and mentors". Even with those reasonably clear statements there is still an endless debate in FLL over what level of "guidance" a coach should provide.

Reading discussion here on Chief Delphi, the mentor/student relationship seems to be regarded as one of the central foci of FRC. Dave Lavery is quoted as saying that you've missed the point without it. Also, it appears to be a component unique to FRC. But, as a new mentor coming into FRC and looking into the mentor resource materials I found nothing to indicate that the FRC mentor/student relationship is any different than that in FLL or any other similar program.

I do admit I don't see anything in the FRC Mentoring Guide saying that mentors should not design or build part or even all of their team's robot -- "It doesn't say you can't...", to borrow an often-used FIRST phrase. ;)

But...

I don't find it surprising that some -- even many -- are not aware of a special mentor/student relationship that is unique to FRC where mentors do some or a lot of "The Work".

I learned about my role as an FRC mentor by watching and listening to other mentors on my team. Had I talked to mentors from other teams I probably would have a heard different stories about the role of a mentor.

It seems to me that since the FRC mentor/student relationship is special and unique it should be featured and explained prominently in the official mentor resource materials, along with specific examples of how it is implemented by various teams. People shouldn't have to search for a speech made by Dave Lavery that's buried somewhere on Chief Delphi or have to read between the lines in the FRC Mentoring Guide. There should be a FRC Mentor-Student Relationship chapter, or even a book.

Reading about "I Do, You Watch, ... You Do, I Watch" in the mentoring guide leaves me with lots of questions about what exactly should I do and when should I do it. I admit I'm one of those Aspergers-types that often has to be hit over the head with an idea spelled out to me, but it would really help if I could see something official -- even a paragraph -- letting me know if it's OK for a mentor to dirty his/her hands with 50% building, 100% building, a subsystem, the software, or nothing at all. I've had conversations with FRC leaders who I respect who opine on opposite sides of this debate.

Maybe there could be a mentor rule book.

It could be very short with an entry like:
<M0> Anything goes -- you and your team decide

Or:
<M0> Mentors shall keep their hands behind their backs always.

Or a bit longer with entries like:
<M2482> Each student on the electrical team will be responsible for insertion of at least one power wire into the power distribution board. If there are more students than power wires, enough wires will be removed for reconnection so that each student is able to experience the insertion of at least one wire, as long as said wires comply with the rules set forth in the robot manual, and as long as the aforementioned students are of pre-college age. Post high-school age team members should refer to rule <M6855>.

;)

However, unless the rule is <M0>, I think there will always be a debate similar to the one over what level of "guidance" is legal in FLL.


This mentor/student relationship stuff seems to me headline material right up there with Inspiration, It's More Fun To Create A Video Game Than Play One, and Gracious Professionalism. That is why I believe it's important that it be thoroughly and officially explained **and endorsed** in the FIRST mentor resources.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I've never had a problem with mentors doing a large part of "the work" as you put it. This is allowed within FIRST and FIRST has struggled to keep the competition about the students and not about the robot. There was a time when sons stood by their fathers and watched to learn the trade and to someday take over. The same was true of daughters and mothers though at that time in a domestic role. The point is that they can learn by just watching... then, because they are in their teens, they become curious and want to try it themselves. I sometimes think being a mentor is easy... every brief now and then...
Anyway, case and point... you learned from the mentors by watching and listening to mentors. Same process works with young men and women in their teens....
Teens.... OK.... now I remember why being a mentor is tricky... but its cool.... ( South Park has ruined my life....)

Re: Another Culture Change
 

We have 2-1/2 mentors running an 8-team, 50-student VRC program. I only wish that I actually had time to build some robots. I spend my mentoring life dealing with parts acquisition and storage, asking "are you sure that battery is charged," and doing 3-minute design reviews. If the senior students weren't helping the new ones, all of our robots would be Protobots. The success of Exothermic Robotics started with the five students who joined five years ago, and their passing along their knowledge to new students. (Don't even ask what it looks like when I try to drive a competition robot. I don't like being laughed at.)

Re: Another Culture Change
 

Not that this statement needs confirming, but I've seen Rick drive a robot. :eek:

Thankfully it was at a teachers' workshop where he actually looked pretty darn good compared to most of his fellow adults.

Jason

Re: Another Culture Change
 

This type of praise means more to us than complements on our robot (although those are welcome at any time too). The MOE culture is due most of all to our leaders, especially and predominantly Mr MOE himself, John Larock. He is MOE.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

Great blog JVN, thanks for sharing, and my goodness I am late to this conversation.

First, my hopefully short and concise thoughts on the events you speak of seem more or less reflective of the state of culture in a fair (not all, but a handful) number of places in the US. In my neighborhood and those surrounding it there are attitudes that seem out of place. Heck, in conversation with someone at a company around here this person uttered some things about another country that frankly put a dent in things.

Then there's the state of politics in this country, but we've been there before on CD... ;) (2004 though was frankly heaven compared to what we've seen lately...)

The solution to this mess is best left to social scientists, and I'll leave it at that. That is not to say FIRST should not bother with this problem: a culture of professionalism seems to be a mitigating factor when keeping the nasty stuff out, and the GP concept is a loveable, irreplaceable, forbidden to be removed part of FIRST.

****

Now for some perspective from being on Team 66.

My 4 years on it (2004-2007) were interesting. All of them started the same: kick-off, meeting at the 'war room' the Sunday after to go through the concept design brainstorming process (list possibilities, knock off the unlikely possibilities, end of day: have a rough idea of what we want), the following week refine the design down to specific mechanisms, and then spend the next few weeks building the practice field, learning how to use lathes, drill presses, grinders, etc. etc. etc. while getting briefed on any changes to design that occurred. A few times we got to ride in a little cart to tour select parts of the plant that we worked in, and now that it is closed, I am forever thankful for having that opportunity.

Which leads to perhaps a point to drop here: I have been thinking back occasionally wondering, what was actually more important? learning the skills necessary to build a robot? or learning the thinking process necessary to get there? a process which coincidentally can be applied to a lot of other things with a few minor tweaks.

The former, skills to build X, depend highly upon the availability of resources to get it done, and resources are limited so long as we're stuck here on Earth (thus why measure 2 or more times, cut once, recycle/reuse the rest if possible). The latter, a thought process, depends only on your mind and mine, which lasts pretty much until death, and can be used in a countless number of things (i.e. Data Mining, a personal favorite), including those which have yet to be encountered.

(Repeating that last point was not an accident...)

I digress, back to the main point. So 66 became a powerhouse after 4 years of existence (2002, birth 1998) because we had professionals, who knew their stuff and knew it well, demonstrate their craft. From 2004 on, this was the way things went. It's clearly worked, and in fact has worked so well that even without the mentor resources/other resources once available, 66 has been able to compete strongly this season.

So competitiveness becomes a norm, outreach follows, because there's a stable platform to work out from.

How has this worked? Well, day after kick off this year, I stop by the now 1 year old new nest of the team, and I discover more NXT bricks than ever laying around the room (6?). This is progress from the year I graduated, where we only had one NXT brick and a struggling FLL team (partly my fault for not doing the proper work to set up a decent structure as I was more concerned with the existence of a team... , partly the fault of a lack of resources within the district/will, and time on my end as there was school and dual enrollment).

Also, I heard that there were some 20-30 kids, mostly new ones on the team. I found that out officially this weekend. Greatest thing: it's probably the most diverse in cultural background than the team has ever been. It's _______ beautiful, and humbling, and amazing, and beyond anything I had ever imagined. Now it's just a matter of getting these kids exposed to the methods of design, the thinking involved, the teamwork necessary, and they'll have things that will last their entire lifetime if they take care to use it.

Oh yeah, an actual robotics class... good Lord it came to life. Yes!!!

Obviously, a lot of detail is missing here, and I do not have details to what all he did (beyond finding new sponsors and negotiating with the board of ed.), but the current teacher/mentor of 66 has done an amazing job.

So this should be taken as perspective. I've been in the camp of more student involvement certainly, to the point where I always help out with the other team in town at the annual festival, and as a result have made great friends over the years. We keep in touch.

This all said, there are things from the mentor built end of the world that are worth reading between the lines on, because they're important, more so than often noted. I hope to have successfully hinted on it here.

*puts two steel pennies in the can*

:cool:

Re: Another Culture Change
 

Every sport, even FIRST, has "jocks" that are sore losers and ungratious winners.

As a rookie team mentor in the Los Angeles regional I did notice some of the powerhouse teams (recent champs) have a mix of kind and cocky kids. The mentors all were really nice and professional, and in the pits everyone was very helpful. But, once on the field, even members of our own alliance were a bit pushy, jockying for positions, and in one instance telling my kids what OUR strategy would be. Supposed to be a team effort.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I always find it wiser to defer to experience. And alot of rookies just do their own thing (just driving around and bumping into things aint gonna cut it). If you prove quite effective at executing the strategy and are a flexible talent you may catch their eye.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

Positively unacceptable. I can believe the local crowd booing, I can even give the belief to students being derogatory from time to time, but to have it as the norm for even mentors is profound.

All I'll say is my advice for all: Be Aces

Aces are knights of a round table. Aces are battlemasters who give respect and receive admiration. Aces strive to uphold the virtues of hard work and humility. Aces are people who work not for themselves, but their friends, their teams and humanity as a whole. Finally, Aces work to the bitter end to uphold and spread these values.

Be Aces, FIRST.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

People who make these kinds of comments against powerhouses such as 1114 aren't realizing that students on teams with mentor built robots are getting gypped out of a lot more than regional wins and awards. I've heard many complaints from students of teams that are too tightly controlled by their mentors. Some of these students even ask for advice on chiefdelphi.

You would think if 1114 or other powerhouses had this sort of problem, a student might have complained about it by now?

Re: Another Culture Change
 

I agree with Koko, sometimes the experience is what leads the alliance. I was involved for 3 years on a successful team and I have been going to competitions since 2003 so I'm not foreign to how matches go and effective strategies since I have watched so much. This year mentoring a rookie team and being the drive coach was good lesson in humility as in many matches I couldn't just say what everyone else should do, it wasn't my place. Now that doesn't mean that rookies should just listen and that is it. By mid friday our team had been in the top 5 all day so we did have more say in the alliance strategy. Where you excell and stand out to these powerhouses is that you do what they ask and then some! I told our drivers in a match when we were with 2 of the best robots on the field that they were to stay out of their way even if it meant we couldn't score because getting in their way as a low row robot was only hurting our alliance.

Being told is never something anyone wants, but it is something we will always face in life both on and off the field.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

As Mentor for Team 1708 and a Pittsburgh native let me apologize to Team 1114 and all FIRST teams who may have been affected by this behavior. Our team was in the pit right next to 1114 and I pray we were not part of the offenders, if so I do apologize and ask that someone please notify me of this behavior, it will stop.

When 1708 entered The Peterson Events Center in 2005 after entering FRC with two and a half weeks left in the build season and carrying our tools in grocery bags we were in awe of what we saw. That soon ended when an adult from an established FIRST community outside of Pittsburgh and sporting multicolored hair came by our table and commented to a friend "what is that piece of crap doing here", welcome to FIRST team 1708. Luckily for us Team 365 and John Larock were also at the event and taught us about "Gracious Professionalism". and what FIRST really is.

1114 you have an awesome 'bot, organization and drive team, so good we all want to beat you, but not this way. Go Teams.

Re: Another Culture Change
 

As much as I'd love to read all 18 pages, I can't bring myself to do it right now.

That being said, I should hope that in the future, if a team is receiving a significant amount of heckling, enough that the staff/judges would be prompted to apologize to the team, that someone would get a quick announcement made in between the matches, or during the next day's opening ceremonies.

Names, team numbers, details, and social security numbers don't need to be mentioned, but the staff should have every right to address this issue publicly, whether it's through the MC, the announcer, or whomever else is permitted to have the floor for a few minutes.